From my admittedly tangential read, there is a hypothesis floated in legal circles that cypherdoc's involvement is somewhat more complex than simple shilling. ...
At least you admit repeating gossip and narrative, rather than primary sources.  ... No, it was a hypothesis. I mentioned it in several ways in a fairly compact way. If you will not entertain and explore a variety of hypotheses it is nearly certain that your view of the world will be highly contained and constrained and you'll be caught flat footed by almost everything of importance. What a pleasant excursion into generalities and platitudes. Does it have anything to do with the specific matter at hand, IE the fact that a 10% sales commission is not unusual, unethical, nor illegal? I've already explained why the conspiracy theory you call a hypothesis does not comport with the actual timeline of events. Perhaps you could address how we are supposed to find value in entertaining a theory at odds with already known facts. Is it purely an exercise in imagination and creativity for the sake of making sure Katten gets paid, or what? Oh, that's right, I forgot. You have some grievance with Frap.doc over other matters, but want to bash him with any weapon possibilly available, no matter how far-fetched. |
|
|
|
Is there a donation address for I2P integration? I think resiliency, not adoption, should be be the highest priority. Adoption will take care of itself given a superior product. 99.9% of the millions of people capable of using a CLI don't know or GAF about XMR, and those are the ones who can help build the GUI, etc. |
|
|
|
the congestion really has only just begun. if it persists, yes, ppl will start to stop using Bitcoin. the exit starts slowly at first and then will morph into a stampede; especially if the price starts plunging. the mempool is a problem that does have to be fixed so that ordinary users can start getting their tx's through. they won't be as patient as some of us here.
Hi doc. I can't help but notice with each passing day you sound more like a Buttcoiner. No, with each passing day you sound more like a stalker. You are not able to attract people on your own thread. Are you allergic to logical consistency or what? No one is forcing you to read my posts, this thread, or this forum. You are free to use the Ignore button, or perhaps go play some golf. This thread isn't moderated, but you may create one that is if you don't want to be pestered by people noting you sound exactly like a Buttcoiner, except say "Cripplecoin" instead. your knee jerk mouthy masturbation stops you from even identifying who you're talking to. you just assume any criticism comes from me while being unable to understand that most ppl around here think you're a thug aka Monero Pimp. you're here to try and bring me down for the Cripplecoiners. ain't gonna happen. go blow more iCE, iCEBlow. LOL, he sounded exactly like you! Are you twins?  |
|
|
|
the congestion really has only just begun. if it persists, yes, ppl will start to stop using Bitcoin. the exit starts slowly at first and then will morph into a stampede; especially if the price starts plunging. the mempool is a problem that does have to be fixed so that ordinary users can start getting their tx's through. they won't be as patient as some of us here.
Hi doc. I can't help but notice with each passing day you sound more like a Buttcoiner. No, with each passing day you sound more like a stalker. You are not able to attract people on your own thread. And last week you were saying how much you like my posts bumping your thread to the top. Are you allergic to logical consistency or what? No one is forcing you to read my posts, this thread, or this forum. You are free to use the Ignore button, or perhaps go play some golf. This thread isn't moderated, but you may create one that is if you don't want to be pestered by people noting you sound exactly like a Buttcoiner, except say "Cripplecoin" instead. |
|
|
|
I just wanted you to say "no, I don't want to bet against the block size limit increasing within the next year (since it likely will)"  Sorry, this season of All My Bitcoins is about the "best" block size. Next year, XT is the villain and there is briefly some FUD about whether it or QT is the "real" Bitcoin. /spoilers What is the real bitcoin will be clear after just a few blocks, maybe 20. Its obvious he doesn't want to bet because he knows he will loose. Good job Peter. It's obvious the terms of the bet are ambiguous (Core vs XT will both claim to be the "real" Bitcoin), and I explained why the limit might be changed for some good reason (fiat dies and Sidechains suddenly rule the world), but not for the controversial, exaggerated reasons given at present. |
|
|
|
Next year, XT is the villain and there is briefly some FUD about whether it or QT is the "real" Bitcoin.
What is the real bitcoin will be clear after just a few blocks, maybe 20. You are entitled to your opinion.  |
|
|
|
From my admittedly tangential read, there is a hypothesis floated in legal circles that cypherdoc's involvement is somewhat more complex than simple shilling. That is, his wallet acts as a protected buffer and his shilling fees exist as an excuse and to escape future legal 'violence'. Whether I like or trust the legal system or not, I'd rather see the funds I put in to support it (my taxes) used to tug at this string than to help resolve disputes between other faceless corporate giants which is where most of the money goes. That's only because I happen to be into Bitcoin though. Ideally the court system and government generally would studiously ignore Bitcoin, but that ship has already sailed.
At least you admit repeating gossip and narrative, rather than primary sources. Cypherdoc's involvement as a paid endorser, who took on the role of a proxy for the community by visiting HF in person, started and stopped long before anyone knew business conditions for 3rd gen ASIC companies were about to take a turn for the worse. |
|
|
|
I just wanted you to say "no, I don't want to bet against the block size limit increasing within the next year (since it likely will)" Sorry, this season of All My Bitcoins is about the "best" block size. Next year, XT is the villain and there is briefly some FUD about whether it or QT is the "real" Bitcoin. /spoilers |
|
|
|
Care to make a wager, iCEBREAKER? 1 BTC that the longest proof-of-work chain contains a block larger than 1 MB by this time next year (10-Jul-2016).
If you lose, I want real Bitcoin. If you win, expect to be paid in doublespent Gavincoins. Did you just agree to the bet? I can't tell. We'd both deposit 1 BTC to a multisig address (3rd key held by neutral party). If the chain forks, the winner would automatically have coins spendable on both sides. You can't tell because you edited out the part of my post which answered your question: 1MB blocks may become a harmful constraint by this time next year, given some black swan for fiat or rapid deployment of sidechain/Lightning. But we're are not even on course to begin getting there yet, given the unwelcome distraction of the Gavinista insurgency inciting the get-rich-quick XT mob. TX fees are still orders of magnitude below their cost in electricity, etc., demonstrating fee pressure insufficient for develop mature markets. I suspect we agree that should 1MB blocks become an undeniably urgent concern (EG, if we see actual congestion resulting in appropriate fees no longer prioritizing their tx) the controversy will rapidly dissipate and be replaced by emergent rough consensus.
There's also the possibility we do get a technically and politically feasible velvet divorce, in which case we can forget all this nasty controversy about the "best" block size and start a new nasty controversy about which is the "real" Bitcoin. Does ^that^ help, or do you require pictorial aids like dear old befuddled Doctor Frappuccino?  |
|
|
|
lol. that's China winding up. big break thru the 200MA:
Just yesterday you were saying if we weren't being crippled by iCEBlow and his Cripplecoiners, we'd have had the huge LTC rally here.
Do you see the lack of consistency there, or do I need to draw you a picture?  i don't have to be right on the price. if it decides to go up, i'll be glad. it's all speculation that we don't have control of. but when it comes down to how to run Bitcoin, as in financial conflicts or not, or adhering to Satoshi's original vision, darn right i'm consistent in my message and what i think is right. you, otoh, are a Monero Pimp. i wouldn't be surprised if you were a Blockstream shill as well. IOW, "NO iCEBREAKER, I DON'T SEE THE INCONSISTENCY THERE AND YES, I DO NEED YOU TO DRAW ME A PICTURE." Fine.  I'm not asking you to correctly predict the price or even refrain from speculation. That would be silly. I'm asking for some logical consistency, or an admission you must make up shit as you go along. In a way, I suppose we already have implicit admission of the latter...as you simultaneously fault gmax for "general bearishness on Bitcoin" and throw around the term "Cripplecoin." You think I'd be a good Blockstream shill? Great, I'll put that on my application! |
|
|
|
The bitcoin copes better with high transaction volume than bitcoinwisdom does for displaying exchange trades.
Bitcoin was built to function perfectly under load. Bitcoinwisdom, perhaps less so.  Temporary subsidy enhancement of block reward is only there to support miners (and seed distribution) while adoption (IE volume, IE load) bootstraps on and off-chain fee markets. Care to make a wager, iCEBREAKER? 1 BTC that the longest proof-of-work chain contains a block larger than 1 MB by this time next year (10-Jul-2016).
If you lose, I want real Bitcoin. If you win, expect to be paid in doublespent Gavincoins. 1MB blocks may become a harmful constraint by this time next year, given some black swan for fiat or rapid deployment of sidechain/Lightning. But we're are not even on course to begin getting there yet, given the unwelcome distraction of the Gavinista insurgency inciting the get-rich-quick XT mob. TX fees are still orders of magnitude below their cost in electricity, etc., demonstrating fee pressure insufficient for develop mature markets. I suspect we agree that should 1MB blocks become an undeniably urgent concern (EG, if we see actual congestion resulting in appropriate fees no longer prioritizing their tx) the controversy will rapidly dissipate and be replaced by emergent rough consensus.
There's also the possibility we do get a technically and politically feasible velvet divorce, in which case we can forget all this nasty controversy about the "best" block size and start a new nasty controversy about which is the "real" Bitcoin. Won't that be fun? |
|
|
|
lol. that's China winding up. big break thru the 200MA:
Just yesterday you were saying if we weren't being crippled by iCEBlow and his Cripplecoiners, we'd have had the huge LTC rally here.
Do you see the lack of consistency there, or do I need to draw you a picture? EDIT: And once again, LTC acts as the silver to BTC's gold by frontrunning and pre-announcing its big brother's price spike. What ho, smooth? |
|
|
|
Peter is definitely part of the problem. so it's not surprising that iCEBlow holds him up as one of his Daddy's.
his problem is that he's had a problem with Gavin going back years on end so his current position on opposing Gavin's ideas are unsurprising. it's just all the other whoring he does on Reddit and Twitter that really make one suspicious. he's a much smarter version of Tim Swanson.
Your problem is that you've had a problem with gmax going back years on end, so your current position opposing all of the core devs' ideas is unsurprising. It's just all the whoring you do on Bitcointalk and Reddit, that make one suspicious. You're a much smarter version of Jorge Stolfi. Peter is part of the reason Bitcoin has a good chance of successfully scaling to 1MB. What has your African boy fetishism done for Bitcoin?  |
|
|
|
I worry about the current Bitcoin bullshit with transactions, I can afford paying $0.25 to send money around the globe. Someone who is in Venezuela cant. I dont know if the answer if raising the block limit, using sidechains for regionally curriences backed by bitcoin or what
But to the Dev Masters - quit your fucking bitching - come to an answer and fix the fucking problem at halving and be done with it.
There is no "fucking problem." There is only the endless whining of economically illiterate people like you. For those of us who can't afford $0.25 BTC fees, there's Litcoin, Peercoin, Nubits (pegged to the dollar, neat!), Monero, etc.  Quit your fucking bitching. We're tired of it. It will never change Bitcoin, because You. Have. No. Power. Here. |
|
|
|
they have this silly libertarian definition of "free market" as "a market without government regulations".
Libertarians are not anarchists. They are in favor of government regulating force/fraud in markets, but not central planning to pick the winners and losers. To use a sports analogy, firms are the teams competing to provide the most value to the public, while a proper non-coercive government is the referee who maintains a level playing field. When the ref gets bribed by one team to make bad calls, the fans in the stands lose. If you could stop beating your anarchist strawman and pretending it's a victory over libertarians, that would be great. |
|
|
|
Given the deadlock, I honestly start to think it might be good to do a 'divorce'. As in, we actually agree to disagree, and all see that there are fundamentally incompatible opinions with regards to the direction of Bitcoin. But we can keep it friendly. This might be less damage/cost than having a hardfork battle solving it in January 2016.
That way we can avoid the fighting and truly let the market work out the rest. We divide up the common assets of the web sites, code repos etc. between Bitcoin/QT and Bitcoin/XT. Make it clear that Bitcoin is now two Bitcoins, and that the user has to decide.
QT and XT simply seem like two people who shouldn't be married. Better have a clean divorce than endless fighting.
Thoughts?
Clean divorce? Yah right, as if! The Gavinistas are trying to take sole custody of the core dev's child. The one they raised from a baby and devoted thousands of hours to nurturing. There are already false allegations of abuse flying around. It's been getting uglier and messier for months now, with no resolution in sight. All of this, just so Hearn can make Bitcoin pull his XT wagon instead of launching it as a proper, independent altcoin. This is worse than the time the DASH dev rode Darkcoin's coattails to launch his crappy new coin. |
|
|
|
Hello im looking to buy BTC-e old accounts + email access pay 5$ each one! Pm me!
Why do you want them? I have one from 2011 or '12, but won't sell it for $5 because BTC-e may eventually catch up with current technology by adding Monero. |
|
|
|
the congestion really has only just begun. if it persists, yes, ppl will start to stop using Bitcoin. the exit starts slowly at first and then will morph into a stampede; especially if the price starts plunging. the mempool is a problem that does have to be fixed so that ordinary users can start getting their tx's through. they won't be as patient as some of us here.
Hi doc. I can't help but notice with each passing day you sound more like a Buttcoiner. Specifically, Jorge Stolfi - the Buttcoiner's big fat smart-bug: The "new devs" are impatient for the network to saturate so that the "fee market" will arise, and they have invented several spiffy gadgets to handle it that they are dying to use. No matter how people explain, they don't want to understand that
* even 80% of saturation would render the use of bitcoin a nightmare, driving users away from bitcoin and stopping its growth well before full saturation.
* when the traffic will stop growing, say at ~80% of capacity in daily average, the "traffic jams" will arise erratically at peak hours and at random variations of demand and supply;
* the queue lengths will vary pretty fast during a jam, and will be emptied in a few hours;
* the fees will be useless outside of the jams;
* the right fees will be impossible to predict during a jam, because each jam will be different, the queue status will vary too fast;
* the right fee that you should use to be among the first 2500 entries of the queue that will get into the next block depends on the 3000 transactions that will be issued in the next 10 minutes, by 3000 clients who are trying to choose a fee that will put their transactions ahead of yours;
* twidding the fees will not reduce the average delay by one second, only make everybody spend more money and make the individual delays more unpredictable;
* many clients will end up paying much more than the standard fee, only to wait more than if the transactions were processed first-come, first served;
* most clients -- espcially those who issue important transactions -- have better things to do with their time than sit two hours watching the queues and playing the silly "fee hopscotch" game.
It is useless to point out to them that no business in the world, from lemonade stands to airline manufacturers, uses (or could use) anything remotely like this bizarre pricing mechanism. It is useless to explain to them that the "fee market" will not be a "fRee market", because they have this silly libertarian definition of "free market" as "a market without government regulations".
Unfortunately, they are so detached from the real world, so fired up with the "fee market" fantasy, and so anxious to see their toys at work -- that they cannot even understand how that "fee market" will transform the act of paying something with bitcoin from a mildly complicated routine into an absolutely stupid, lengthy, incomprehensible and frustrating game.
They are like kids who set fire to the house because they want to play firemen and put the filre out with their water guns.
Bitcoin has been dead for more than a year, and was very sick before that. What is still twitching there is a bizarre and terribly expensive payment system that resembles bitcoin, and works like it for some puroses; but with a crucial difference -- it depends on 5 people not having bad ideas.
Besides the trivial 'Buttcoin' vs 'Cripplecoin' choice of vocabulary and your lacking their keen sense of puckish humor, you seem to agree with most/all of their Standard Litany of Reasons Why Butt/Cripple-coin Has Failed, Is Failing, and Will Fail. Any thoughts on this? Perhaps you should take your ball, go home, and become the LeBron of Buttcoin! |
|
|
|
"Fork of July"
Beast of Apocalypse of the Anagavinists
Heh, very droll. Tres bot mots! Yes, I do understand the categorical but academic difference between a chain fork and a codebase fork. I was intentionally conflating them to illustrate their functional equivalency insofar as adding to BTC's Mainchain additional parallel capacity. The "new devs" are impatient for the network to saturate so that the "fee market" will arise, and they have invented several spiffy gadgets to handle it that they are dying to use. No matter how people explain, they don't want to understand that
[generic r/buttcoin litany of ReasonsTM why Bitcoin is dead (but inexplicably hasn't stopped moving yet)]
I'm not sure from where you're getting this "new" adjective. Adam Back is BTC's grandfather, if not (part of) Satoshi Himself. Luke-jr as been around since forever. Ditto Garzik, etc. AFAIK, gmax is the newest kid on the block(chain). The ad hom is irrelevant in any case, because the claim you infer from it, that "they have invented several spiffy gadgets to handle it that they are dying to use," is not accurate. Sidechains and Lightening are spiffy to be sure, but we are seeing them being slowly deployed via the proper (IE whitepaper->peer review->prototype->testnet->listserve feedback->BIP) process, in marked contrast to the Gavinista's insurgent tactics of going straight to the drooling masses and inciting the mob to demand Action Now. |
|
|
|
if we weren't being crippled by iCEBlow and his Cripplecoiners, we'd have had the huge LTC rally here.
Yep. This is my take:  Bwah-ha-ha! I thank you for that, because I know Frap.doc will be greatly annoyed by being put on the same page as the alt-coiners he hates with such sectarian passion. The best part is, he did it to himself with his envious, intemperate "if we weren't being crippled by iCEBlow and his Cripplecoiners, we'd have had the huge LTC rally here" remark. Maybe it's a good idea to diversify investments in a new sector and keep a few carefully chosen hedges around, instead of getting married in a religious ceremony to one particular enterprise? Nah, that would violate the principle known as Frappuccino_Doc's Razor:
"The single form of e-cash in which I am heavily invested is so totally legitimate it will replace gold, Visa, and car wash tokens; but everything else is a Ponzi Scheme."It's just like when you are driving. Everyone going slower than you is a granny creating a safety hazard; everyone going faster than you is a suicidal moran. Enjoy your road rage, Frap.doc! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
